|Pope Benedict XVI with members of Chief Rabbinate of Counterfeit Israel at whose request he, inter alia, mauled one of the most ancient prayers of the Catholic liturgy|
On the day of the announcement of a papal resignation, everywhere one looks–from the establishment press to ‘underground’ diviners of the entrails of cryptocracy-controlled pop culture–we are reminded that Pope Benedict XVI, arguably the most disastrously philojudaic pope in history, “was a member of the Hitler Youth,” just as the establishment heralded his pontificate in 2005 and the Vatican itself conspicuously reminded us in 2009.
We have often pointed out this baseless, guilt-inducing ‘you are Nazis in need of unending, radical reform’ message of the establishment and its purpose to no discernible effect. It’s unlikely to be any different in this case.
Making predictions is not the business of this writer, but based upon the past one imagines that there will be much debilitating speculation about and anticipation of the next of so many impending apocalypses and endings of the Church which has in reality been in process since the first of so many Judases betrayed Christ for Pharisaic silver 2000 years ago.
This day in Jewish history / An anti-pope of Jewish descent dies
Many heads of the Catholic Church have been rumored to be of Jewish lineage, but it is fairly certain that Anacletus was the great-grandson of [an unconverted usurer].
David B. Green – Haaretz
On January 25, 1138, the anti-pope Anacletus II died. Although many heads of the Catholic Church have been rumored over the ages to be of Jewish descent, it is fairly certain that Anacletus, born Pietro Pierleoni (his date of birth is unknown), was the great-grandson of a converted Jew.
The term “anti-pope” has been used in situations where the election of the pontiff has been disputed, so that two candidates have laid claim to the title. The one who in the end achieves recognition is the one who goes down in history as pope, with his opponent being remembered as an “anti-pope.”
Baruch, the great-grandfather of Anacletus, was a Roman moneylender who converted to Christianity and changed his name to Benedict. He married into Roman aristocracy, and it was his grandson, Petrus Leonis, who resolved to have his son enter the priesthood. Petrus studied in Paris and was a Benedictine monk at the abbey Cluny, before returning to Rome. Pope Paschal II appointed him a cardinal in 1111 or 1112.
In February 1130, while Pope Honorius II lay dying, a group of cardinals decided they would promote Cardinal Gregory Papareschi to the papacy. They arranged to elect Papareschi within hours of the death of Honorious, and to install him as Pope Innocent II the following day, on February 14. That same day, however, a majority of cardinals, who included most of those that elected Innocent but now had misgivings over the impropriety of the process, convened and named Pietro Pierleoni as pope.
Pierleoni’s family was still a major banking power in Rome, so it’s little surprise that support for his papacy was complete in that city. But Innocent, who fled Italy for France, was able to line up the political support of the influential Cistercian monk Bernard of Clairvaux, who persuaded both the leaders and the church hierarchy of France, England and Germany to recognize Innocent. Lothair, the Holy Roman Emperor, invaded Rome in 1132, and occupied all but St. Peter’s Basilica and the pope’s castle, St. Angelo, so that it was possible for Innocent to be crowned as pope (again) on June 4, 1133. Nonetheless, Innocent soon had to flee Rome again, this time for Pisa.
The papal schism thus continued, with the enemies of Anacletus making much of his Jewish ancestry. He was accused of robbing the church of much of its wealth, together with Jewish helpers, and of incest. Only after the death of Anacletus, on this day in 1138, did Innocent become the undisputed pope, and that happened only two months later, when the man whom the supporters of Anacletus elected to succeed him, Cardinal Gregory Conti, resign from the papacy.
Though the Pierleoni were conceded to be one of the wealthiest and most powerful senatorial families of Rome, and though they had staunchly supported the Popes throughout the fifty years’ war for reform and freedom, yet it was never forgotten that they were of Jewish extraction, and had risen to wealth and power by usury.
The Cardinal’s grandfather, named Leo after Pope Leo IX, who baptized him, was a faithful adherent of Gregory VII; Leo’s son, Peter, from whom the family acquired the appellation of Pierleoni, became leader of the faction of the Roman nobility which was at enmity with the Frangipani. His marble coffin may still be seen in the cloisters of St. Paul’s, with its pompous inscription extolling his wealth and numerous offspring.
His attempt to install his son as Prefect of Rome in 1116, though favoured by the Pope, had been resisted by the opposite party with riot and bloodshed. His second son, the future antipope, was destined for the Church. After finishing his education at Paris, he became a monk in the monastery of Cluny, but before long he was summoned to Rome by Pope Paschal II and created Cardinal-Deacon of SS. Cosmas and Damian.
He accompanied Pope Gelasius on his flight to France, and was employed by successive pontiffs in important affairs, including legations to France and England. If we can believe his enemies, he disgraced his high office by gross immorality and by his greed in the accumulation of lucre. Whatever exaggeration there may be as to other charges, there can be no doubt that he was determined to buy or force his way into the Papal Chair …
Anacletus maintained his popularity in Rome by the lavish expenditure of his accumulated wealth and the plundered treasures of the churches. His letters and those of the Romans to Lothair of Germany remaining unanswered, he secured a valuable confederate in Duke Roger of Apulia, whose ambition he satisfied by the gift of royalty; on Christmas Day, 1130, a cardinal-legate of Anacletus anointed at Palermo. the first King of the Two Sicilies, a momentous event in the history of Italy.
St. Bernard of Clairvaux, who had come to Rome in the interests of the legitimate pontiff, was the principle agent in persuading the followers of the late anti-pope to return to their allegiance, and even brought in person the chief members of the Pierleone [banking] family, to the feet of Innocent who received them kindly and promoted them to high offices and honors.
The Pierleone, although they had failed in the attempt to set up a pope from among themselves, long continued to be among the Roman nobles; and centuries later, the flatterers of the imperial House of Habsburg sought to exalt its greatness by tracing out for it a connexion with the family of the Jewish usurer.
Maximilian Krah recently graduated from an international usurers program run jointly by the Columbia Business School and London School of Business. A video of the graduation ceremony was posted on youtube. It shows the Mossad-connected Oren Heiman speaking before the graduating class. Maximilian Krah is shown sitting in the first row, third from the right on the screen as the camera pans the audience.
As the speech reaches its peak (@7:28), Mr. Heiman implores his classmates never to forget “the power of 72:”
“Before I step down from this glorious podium I ask you–scratch that–I implore you not to forget the one tool we have been instilled with, the mother of all tools, the power grip of global business, of influence, and of the ability to do good[sic] in the world. We have constantly referred to this tool as the power of 72.”
What is the point that Mr. Heiman wishes to emphasize so strongly to his fellow ‘future world leaders.’ When we cut through the sanctimony and mysticism we see quite simply he’s talking about the power of compound interest. The power, law, or rule of 72 as it is alternately called is a formula for calculating the time it takes to double money at a given rate of interest.
But perhaps we shouldn’t dismiss the mysticism entirely because it’s evident that this is more than a mere mathematical equation to these people. The class is composed of a symbolic 72 persons, the ceremony is held in a chapel and Mr. Heiman refers to the ‘power of 72′ as “the mother of all tools.” This is worth a closer look.
|Infiltrator of Merchant of Venice philosophy into Christendom, Franciscan Friar, Luca Pacioli|
One of the earliest written records of ‘the power of 72′ is found in the Summa de Arithmetica of the Renaissance Franciscan Friar, occultist, and mathematician, Luca Pacioli whose writings on double-entry bookkeeping remain influential today and, for good reason, are viewed by many as the genesis of modern capitalism. Fellow friars protested against Luca Pacioli “according to what we understand and see daily as a man who ought to be corrected.” In response to the concerns the friars had regarding this pioneer of our present death culture, he was appointed as head of his monastery by the Franciscan Superior General.
Luca Pacioli is yet another of many Renassaince figures in which avarice, mathematics and occultism, intersect in an ideology which is the progenitor of our rotten age.
Luca Pacioli believed, “all that is manifest throughout the inferior and superior universe, all of it must be by necessity subject to number, weight and measure,” which is barely distinguishable from Queen Elizabeth’s court occultist John Dee’s belief that, “by numbers, a way is had, to the searching out, and understanding of every thing, able to be known. But the Catholic occultist, Luca Pacioli infiltrated this autistic principle into Christendom 60 years before John Dee.
Dear reader, underneath lavish usury-funded Renaissance edifices and artwork is veiled the coldest, inhuman, ungodly, materialist philosophy imaginable which cannot but yeild the most rotten of fruits.
This conceit that God and His creation can be entirely understood and replicated by mathematics is leading us towards destruction and usurious wealth ‘creation’ is at the root of this evil.
There is a certain contingent of traditionalists attempting to resurrect the most rotten aspects of occult, usurious renaissance Catholicism. Beware.
We cannot too quickly wilt before the charge of “anti-semitism” or “anti-Judaism” until we know exactly how these potboiler terms are defined. Keep in mind this same ADL, in line with Jewish historian Jules Isaac, consider St. Thomas Aquinas, St. John Chrysostom, the Saints, Popes and Fathers of the Church, and the Holy Gospel writers themselves as “anti-Semitic”.
Mr. Vennari elaborates in a footnote:
The term “teaching of contempt” was actually coined by Professor Jules Isaac (1877-1963) the “French-Jewish historian” revered by Jews the world over. In his many writings, Isaac waged war against the Holy Gospels as the “true source” of anti- Semitism. According to Isaac: “the permanent and latent source of anti-Semitism is none other than Christian religious teaching of every description and the traditional tendentious interpretations of Scripture.” Since Jules Isaac rejected Jesus Christ as Messiah, he necessarily rejected the New Testament as the inspired, infallible Word of God. To him, the Gospels are fallible human writings that can be critiqued, corrected, or condemned. He is particularly virulent against the Gospel of Matthew: “It is a veritable competition as to who can make the Jews appear most hateful. Richly chequered and pathetic as is the narrator of the fourth Gospel (St. John), the palm goes to Matthew; his unerring hand unleashed the poisoned arrow that can never be withdrawn.” Jules Isaac: Jesus et Israel, p, 571. Quoted in Judaism and the Vatican, Vicomte Leon de Poncis, (first printed 1967, reprinted by Christian Book Club of American, Palmdale, CA, 1999), p. 4
Now, Mr. Vennari recognizes that the ADL and Jules Isaac before him “consider St. Thomas Aquinas, St. John Chrysostom, the Saints, Popes and Fathers of the Church, and the Holy Gospel writers themselves as ‘anti-Semitic;” that Jules Isaac “waged war against the Holy Gospels as the ‘true source’ of anti- Semitism.”
I’d like to know Mr. Vennari’s thoughts on Malachi Martin’s virulent attacks against St. Thomas Aquinas, St. John Chrysostom, the Saints, Popes and Fathers of the Church, and the Holy Gospel writers themselves. I’d be interested to know where Mr. Vennari stands on Malachi Martin’s collusion with Rabbi Abraham Heschel and the American Jewish Committee to publish the book, The Pilgrim, which augments Jules Isaac’s attack on the Church and Christendom.
I ask Mr. Venarri what distinction there is to be made between Jules Isaac’s war against the Gospel and that of Malachi Martin if not that Martin is more brazen and despicable given that he was supposed to be a representative of the Church:
There is yet another tension which is ominous for Christianity because its roots not only go back to the very origins of Christianity, but involve the historical act of Jesus Christ by which Christianity came into being as a principle. The tension is that between Jew and Christian, the historical act is the sacrifice and death of Jesus himself. The manifestation of this tension on the part of Christians is generally called anti-semitism or Hebraeophobia …
… if we listen to the chorus of the ages, we find a strangely consistent note of disapproval, sometimes of hate, and always of unmitigated condemnation for the Jew, as such, echoing down the corridors of time and blending with latter day sentiments which can be recognized as nothing else but rank anti-Semitism. And these ancient voices are not merely those of secular or freelance thinkers: they are no less than the Fathers of the Church, an Irenaeus, a Tertullian, a John Chrysostom, an Augustine, as well as Aquinas, modern theologians and ancient exegetes, an Origen, Grotius, a Müller.
Somehow or other, the stream of this perennial Christian bias grates on our modern ears, and yet there is hardly any Christian or Catholic who cannot, in spite of himself, hear some echo in his own sentiments.
… It is true that we can set down a list of statements by popes theologians, saints, writers, to show that the extremer forms of anti-Semitism … are not admissable. But none ever asserted the religious rights of Judaism in itself, nor declared that Judaism was a valid moral outlook, nor has any theologian or theological school courageously re-examined the millennial attitude of Christians and Catholics to the Jews.
From the 6th century onwards, we find that anti-Semitism is an integral part of Christianity. And down to our own day, it has taken various forms. It may assume the form of an accepted radicalism with sociological overtones, in business, in social life, at the club, on the beach: one does not marry into Jewish circles or consort with Jews, for they are a different race with different customs and differing mentality. It may take the form of mere isolationism: the Jew is somebody apart, somebody irrevocably separate from the truth. Here there is an instant refusal to treat them like others, a blind feeling that this person, the Jew, is marked out by divine decision as untouchable. It may, though, take on a more mobile form: the Jews are to be reckoned with as active enemies of the Faith, and therefore they must be restricted, watched warily. It may, finally, go further and translate such feelings into action: the Jews must be expelled, must be warned, must be punished, must be dispossessed, must be liquidated.
In these extremest forms, we meet some phantasmagoric developments: the Protocols of Sion, The Nazi Final Solution, the massacres by their Catholic Majesties of Spain, the so-called Judeo-Communist world plot against Christianity, and the unholy alliance between the Grand Lodge and the Synagogue to subvert Christian principles. In whatever form or shade or colouring we meet this anti-Semitism, its peculiarly Christian characteristic is clear.
… Between the burning and plundering of all Jewish synagogues in Mesopotamia in 388 A.D. on the order of the Bishop of Callinicum and the destruction and desecration of all synagogues under the recent Nazi regime, we cannot but see a relationship of origin. And no one conscious of what has made modern Europe can deny that the pyres and the crematoria, the mephitic smoke and stench of the extermination camps in Nazi Germany, were, if not the logical conclusion, at least one extremist consequence of the normal Christian attitude to the Jews. Here we see Christianity standing at the thin edge of self-destruction due to this admitted tension, moving to what Laurence Dobie has called aptly the anus mundi [i.e. anus of the world], the ultimate in excretion of the badness which Christianity never undertook to extirpate. (Malachi Martin aka. “Michael Serafian,” The Pilgrim, pp.44-52)
|The CV from Malachi Martin’s other books confirms that he was the author of The Pilgrim|
Malachi Martin: "God Could Have Incarnated as a Cow;" "Priests Should Have Been Female;" Hostile Towards PatriarchyJanuary 11, 2013
“One of the big deficiencies in Christianity is there is no theology of women at all. Although the one thing Jesus needed, the one thing he needed, having decided to become human, the only thing he needed was a woman, and logically all priests should have been female, you know. But male chauvinists got in the way. And as some theologian said, you know –and this is a sideline but let me finish it. As you know it’s theologically possible for God to have become a cow if he decided. He could be incarnated as a cow. But even if he had been incarnated in a cow, we men would have taken over, that’s the extent. But we’ve no theology of woman and no theology of love, really human love, because it involves the essence of woman and I don’t think we know that theologically.” (Malachi Martin, December 7, 1973, Firing Line, interviewed by Skull and Bones Bill Buckley)